Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Geeta Devi And Others vs State Of J&K; And Ors on 1 February, 2018
Author: Sanjeev Kumar
Bench: Sanjeev Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT JAMMU
LPASW No. 211/2017
MP No.1/2017
Date of judgment: 01.02.2018
Geeta Devi and others v State of J&K and ors
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Mr Justice Sanjeev Kumar, Judge.
Appearance:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr B.S.Salathia, Sr. Advocate with
Ms Meenakshi Salathia, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) : Mr Ravinder Gupta, AAG.
i) Whether approved for reporting in : Yes/No
Law journals etc.
ii) Whether approved for publication
in press/Media : Yes/No
Sanjeev Kumar-J
1. Vide notification No.09 of 2013 dated 01.11.2013 the respondent No.3 invited applications for filling up of regular vacancies of teachers in socially and educationally backward areas and in the areas near Line of Actual Control on the pattern of Rehbar-e-Taleem by engagement of Rehbar-e- Taleem Teachers. The advertisement notice was purportedly issued in pursuance of Government Order No.522-EDU of 2013 dated 08.05.2013. As is evident from the perusal of the advertisement notification, only eligible candidates from the revenue villages/village where the schools were functioning were entitled to apply. It was, however, specifically mentioned that the selection would be made in terms of Government Order No.288-Edu of 2009 dated 08.04.2009 wherever applicable. The appellants are, however, concerned with seven posts notified for selection in Girls High School, Pallanwala and four for Middle School, Pallanwala.
LPASW No.211/2017 Page 1 of 82. The appellants claiming to be residents of village Pallanwala and being otherwise eligible in terms of the advertisement notification submitted their application forms for the aforementioned eleven posts of teachers to be filled up as Rehbar-e-Taleem in twin schools of village Pallanwala. At this stage, it may be noted that the revenue village Pallanwala comprised of two panchayat halqas i.e., Panchayat Halqa Upper Pallanwala and Panchayat Halqa Lower Pallanwala. It is admitted by the parties that two schools in question i.e., Girls High School and Middle School are situated in Panchayat Halqa Lower Pallanwala. As has come out from the official record produced before this Court, there are two other schools, namely, Middle School Bandowala and Primary School, Thangar situated in Panchayat Halqa Upper Pallanwala of the revenue village Pallanwala. In the aforesaid schools also respondent No.3 vide notification No.07 of 2013 dated 08.10.2013 had invited applications for engagement of Rehbar-e-Taleem Teachers; three for Bandowala and one for Primary School, Thanger.
3. Although, from the pleadings of the parties, it is not clear as to whether Zonal Education Officer concerned prepared panels for the aforesaid schools by taking the revenue village as unit of selection or the same were prepared on panchayat basis. From a careful scrutiny of records, we find that the merit panels were prepared separately, i.e., one for Middle School, Bandowala and Primary School, Thanger and the other for Girls High School, Pallanwala and Middle School, Pallanwala. As per the guidelines issued by the Government from time to time pertaining to the engagement of Rehbar-e- Taleems, the panel in all the aforesaid schools should have been prepared on revenue village basis and in case it was found that the provisions of Government Order No.288-Edu of 2009 dated 08.04.2009 were attracted, the panel should have been prepared on habitation basis. There is, however, no scope in the Rehbar-e-Taleem Scheme for making any engagement on panchayat basis, that too when the revenue village is a bigger unit than the LPASW No.211/2017 Page 2 of 8 panchayat, as is the case in hand. Be that as it may, it is now apparent from a perusal of the record produced before us by the respondents that the Zonal Education Officer, Khour prepared two separate panels, one for Middle School, Bandowala and Primary School, Thangar and the other for Girls High School, Pallanwala and Govt. Middle School, Pallanwala at panchayat level. While preparing the panel for the twin schools of Girls High School, Pallanwala and Govt. Middle School, Pallanwala, candidates belonging to panchayat Halqa Upper Pallanwala, who had been considered pursuant to notification No.07 of 2013 dated 08.10.2013 for Middle School, Bandowala and Primary School, Thanger were excluded from consideration. Accordingly, the merit panel of all 36 candidates who had applied pursuant to Notification No.09 of 2013 was prepared. The Zonal Education Officer, Khour after proper verification and getting the merit panel signed by the members of Village Education Committee drew the panel of 11 candidates on the basis of inter-se merit. The said panel was displayed for objection from the general public from 04.12.2013 to 10.12.2013 but no objections were received within the stipulated period. In the meanwhile, candidate figuring at serial No.9 of the tentative select panel withdrew his candidature and was replaced by Ms. Mamta Devi by the Zonal Education Officer. It was also found by the Zonal Education Officer concerned that the provisions of Government Order No.288-Edu of 2009 dated 08.04.2009 were not applicable. As is the stand of the respondents which is also borne out from the official records, there was some resentment in different quarters with regard to the manner in which the select panel had been prepared. The public of the area demanded preparation of the select panel on habitation basis by applying Govt. Order No.288-Edu of 2009 dated 08.04.2009. Taking cognizance of the large scale resentment and acting purportedly in larger public interest, respondent No.3 withdrew all the three advertisement notifications including advertisement notification No.09 of 2013 vide notice No.DIP/J-7962/14 which also appears to have been published in some LPASW No.211/2017 Page 3 of 8 newspaper but neither the name of the newspaper nor date of its publication is coming forth from the aforesaid notice, though the copy whereof is appended by the appellant with their writ petition as Annexure-O and the same is also available in the official record.
4. Be that as it may, pursuant to the withdrawal of all the three notifications including notification No.09 of 2013 dated 01.11.2013, respondent No.3 issued a fresh notification, i.e., Notification No.14 of 2013 dated 18.01.2014 whereby the vacancies earlier notified were re-advertised, however, on the same terms and conditions as were laid down in the advertisement notification No.09 of 2013. Since the appellants were amongst the candidates who had been empanelled in the tentative select panel, as such, they felt aggrieved of the withdrawal of the notification No.09 of 2013 as also fresh notification No.14 of 2013 and therefore, challenged the same in SWP No.397/2014. The appellants in their writ petition, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:-
"(a) Issue appointments orders in favour of the petitioners belonging to Village Main Pallanwala in pursuance of Advertisement No.9 of 2013 dated 01.11.2013.
(b) Quash the Advertisement No.14 of 2013 dated 18.01.2014 since its not in violation of Govt. Order No.522-Edu of 2013 dated 08.05.2013."
5. As is apparent from the prayers made by the appellants herein above, the appellants did not specifically challenge the notification No.DIP/J-
7962/14 dated Nil (Annexure-O) with the writ petition whereby the advertisement Notification No.09 of 2013 dated 01.11.2013 besides others had been withdrawn. The appellants, however, sought a direction to the respondents to appoint them in pursuance of advertisement notification No.09 of 2013 dated 01.11.2013. The LPASW No.211/2017 Page 4 of 8 appellants also sought a writ of certiorari to quash notification No.14 of 2013 dated 18.01.2014 whereby the posts against which the appellants had been empanelled had been re-advertised for making a fresh selection. The writ petition was contested by the respondents by filing objections and the same was disposed of by a learned Single Judge of this Court by the impugned judgment dated 28.09.2017. The writ petition, as is apparent from bare perusal of the order impugned, was disposed of on the analogy of SWP No.240/2015 titled Vidhushi and others v. State and others, decided by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 29.03.2017.
6. At this stage, it would be apposite to refer to the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Vidhushi's case (supra). From a bare perusal of the order passed in Vidushi's case, it appears that in the given fact situation, the learned Single Judge had only directed the Deputy Commissioner, Jammu to find out as to whether the stipulation fixed in the Government Order No.288-Edu of 2009 is applicable. The learned Writ Court also directed the competent authority to consider the claim of the writ petitioners therein for appointment accordingly. In the aforesaid backdrop, the appellants are before us in this intra- court appeal.
7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the original record produced by Mr. Ravinder Gupta, appearing for the respondents.
8. The facts in the case are not in dispute. As is apparent from the record, revenue village Pallanwala is one of the biggest revenue villages of Jammu district comprising of two panchayats i.e., Upper Pallanwala and Lower Pallanwala. This position is also not disputed by the parties before us. The schools in question i.e., Girls High School, Pallanwala LPASW No.211/2017 Page 5 of 8 and Middle School, Pallanwala are situated in Panchayat Lower Pallanwala of revenue village Pallanwala. Under Rehbar-e-Taleem Scheme and the guidelines issued from time to time the selection of Rehbar-e-Taleems is required to be made on revenue village basis and where the habitations are scattered and qualifiy to be a village in terms of Government Order No.288-Edu of 2009 dated 08.04.2009, the eligible local candidates of the said habitation are entitled to be considered to the exclusion of others residing in other habitations of the revenue village concerned. In the existing guidelines pertaining to the engagement of Rehbar-e-Taleem Teachers there is no scope to draw the panel at panchayat level. Although, the pleading of the parties are not clear and full of ambiguities, yet we tried to straighten the facts by scrutinizing the original record produced by the respondents. As noted above, there is clear indication in the record that the merit panel/select panels were prepared by the Zonal Education Officer concerned separately for the schools situated in panchayats Upper Pallanwala and Lower Pallanwala respectively.
9. That being the position, the select panel in which the names of the appellants appeared, is apparently drawn at panchayat level by excluding other eligible candidates residing in Panchayat Halqa Upper Pallanwala, though in the same revenue village i.e., revenue village Pallanwala. Similar was the methodology adopted by the respondents while preparing the panel for the schools situated in Panchayat Halqa Upper Pallanwala of revenue village Pallanwala. There is a third panel prepared for Higher Secondary School, Pallanwala on the similar lines. Obviously, there was resentment from different quarters demanding preparation of panels on habitation basis by applying the provisions of Government Order No.288-Edu of 2009 dated 08.04.2009 and the respondents also appear to have realized their LPASW No.211/2017 Page 6 of 8 mistake and therefore, with a view to set the record straight, withdrew all the three notifications including notification No.09 of 2013. This was done by respondent No.3 vide notification No.DIP/J-7962/14, although the reasons given in the withdrawal notification are apparently flimsy and not in consonance with law. As noticed above, there is hardly any difference between the advertisement No.09 of 2013 and the fresh notification issued by respondent No.3 vide advertisement No.14 of 2013 dated 18.01.2014 insofar as terms and conditions for engagement of Rehbar-e-Taleem in the twin schools of Girls High School, Pallanwala and Middle School, Pallanwala are concerned. So the purported reasons given for withdrawal are not tenable.
10. Although, withdrawal notification has not been challenged by the appellants in the writ petition specifically, yet we find that the same, for the reasons indicated above, cannot be sustained and therefore, deserves to be quashed. Thus, once the withdrawal notification is quashed, as a necessary consequence thereof advertisement No.14 of 2013 dated 18.01.2014 also deserves to be quashed insofar as it pertains to filling up of seven posts of Rehbar-e-Taleem in Girls High School, Pallanwala and four posts in Middle School, Pallanwala.
11. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and advertisement notice No. No.DIP/J-7962/14 and advertisement notification No.14 of 213 dated 18.01.2014 insofar as it pertains to filling up of seven posts of Rehbar- e-Taleem in Girls High School, Pallanwala and four posts in Middle School, Pallanwala are quashed.
12. We, however, find that the select panel where the names of the appellants exist is only tentative and is required to be finalized by the competent authority i.e., Director School Education after following LPASW No.211/2017 Page 7 of 8 the laid down procedure, i.e., publication of tentative select panel and inviting objections etc. Therefore, the Zonal Education Officer, Khour shall proceed and submit the tentative select panel prepared by him to respondent No.3 for seeking approval of respondent No.2. It is further made clear that respondent No.2 while finalizing the select panel aforesaid shall invite objections from the aggrieved candidates/public as is the procedure in vogue and finalize the same strictly in consonance with the guidelines issued by the Government from time to time pertaining to the engagement of Rehbar-e-Taleem.
(Sanjeev Kumar) (Badar Durrez Ahmed)
Judge Chief Justice
Jammu
01 .02.2018
Vinod
LPASW No.211/2017 Page 8 of 8